III) Enable a new step in the evolutionary landscape; i.e. general intelligence that's not limited to human brain power, where humans may perhaps no longer be required to exist because smarter, stronger artificial sentient things would instead thrive.

1) How did you decide there is a purpose to life? Where does teleology come in? I am not going to read your links, but it seems to me they will address where things are inevitably heading, which is not a purpose, at least not within science. The ball rolling downhill is does not have the purpose of reaching the bottom2) If it is life's purpose then where does the need to convince anyone of it arise from? If it is, it will happen, so no need to proselytize.3) Perhaps the AI's will do what from our perspective are bad things. I mean, efficiency and optimization in the business world have created workplaces like the horrible Amazon floor where every movement of the workers is monitors and critiqued, a kind of assembly panopticon.

What are some of the differences between using your own brain for making predictions and using an intelligent machine?

1) Brains aren't modular. You can't take them out of a body and plug them into another body. Not unless adequate technology is developed. But right now, this is impossible. This means that brains mostly remain private and inaccessible to other people. They cannot be democratized.

2) Brains can't be produced; certainly not cheaply and in large quantities. Again, this means they can't be democratized.

3) It is extremely difficult to repair broken brains.

4) Machines can make predictions better and faster. Assuming the adequate technology is in place.

5) Machines allow us to free ourselves from low-level, a.k.a. specialized, thinking. You just feed them with data and they give you predictions. You are free to dedicate yourself to higher-level concerns.

6) Interacting with intelligent machines would be slower than interacting with your brain. You need to gather data, make sure it's in the format the machine can understand, tell the machine to make a prediction and then read the prediction from its screen. This can probably be solved with an innovative interface design where the brain interfaces subconsciously with the intelligent machine.

7) Machines are cheap and modular. Anyone can have them. This is an advantage for those who did not previously think or who did not use someone to do the thinking for them. However, it might be a disadvantage for those who already think. Unless machines are well hidden from the public they will lead to "the democratization of intelligence". Anyone will be able to think.

8] ???

What other pros and cons can we list?

I got a philosophy degree, I'm not upset that I can't find work as a philosopher. It was my decision, and I knew that it wasn't a money making degree, so I get money elsewhere.-- Mr. Reasonable

Brains, human ones, are part of a complicated social mammal. Social mammals are capable of empathy and feel vulnerable in certain situations - which could lead to caution in a variety of situations. AIs may well not have these qualities. They may not take into account things even the most despicable humans monsters in human history tended to take into account at least in relation to some life forms.

Human brains which are fallible will design AIs. The designers will likely be working for corporations looking to hit the ground before competitors and thus just past safety conseriderations just as they are doing in other fields. Or they will beworking for governments with similar competitive impatience and recklessness now in relation to other countries' teams.

The incredible skill and intelligences that developed the techniques of plastic surgery leads to some of the most horrific transformations of human faces in the name of profit. At least this is contained to the faces of those wanting to make these changes. AI will likely not be contained.

Are you saying that "if enough people believe something, then it is inevitable?What exactly are you saying here? That that something will come to be?I'm not clear on your quote.

People can also be really superstitious or believe that they know. They absolutely know that they know! lol Then that time comes when they discover that they were wrong. But do they remember that the next time *they know that they know*?

Our perceptions do not necessarily point to or lead to reality.

I do not think that simply because multitudes believe something, it will occur.Take the playoffs for instance. I wonder how many believed that the jaguars would win?But the Patriots won. They came up. Don't ask me how. lolPerhaps that was not such a good example. Still...Nothing is certain until The Fat Lady has sung.

The real question is whether society could put the brakes on this even if it wanted to.

On something coming to fruition?

Computers solve problems. But more complex problems arise as a result. Is there an end to that?

Are you saying that the problems arise because the computers are solving the problems?Reminds me of "For every action, there is a reaction" ~~ "or an equal and opposite reaction."Doesn't everything affect everything else?

“Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.”Viktor E. Frankl

It Felt Love

How did the roseEver open its heartAnd give to this worldAll its beauty?It felt the encouragement of lightAgainst its being,Otherwise,We all remainToo frightenedHafiz

it's slightly veiled in the "A" of the acronym ...representing the word "artificial" ... synonym of the word false.

"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

6) Interacting with intelligent machines would be slower than interacting with your brain. You need to gather data, make sure it's in the format the machine can understand, tell the machine to make a prediction and then read the prediction from its screen. This can probably be solved with an innovative interface design where the brain interfaces subconsciously with the intelligent machine.

What if humans come up with an innovative interface design ... ergo ... belief system ... enabling the human brain to interact with other human brains without any visual or audio? ... remote viewing 2.0

"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

6) Interacting with intelligent machines would be slower than interacting with your brain. You need to gather data, make sure it's in the format the machine can understand, tell the machine to make a prediction and then read the prediction from its screen. This can probably be solved with an innovative interface design where the brain interfaces subconsciously with the intelligent machine.

What if humans come up with an innovative interface design ... ergo ... belief system ... enabling the human brain to interact with other human brains without any visual or audio? ... remote viewing 2.0

"the human brain interacting with other human brains without any visual or audio" is quite common in small (up to a hundred member) native communities. Some members of large and complex civilisations reactivate this capacity with LSD, mushrooms and other mind/brain altering substances.

6) Interacting with intelligent machines would be slower than interacting with your brain. You need to gather data, make sure it's in the format the machine can understand, tell the machine to make a prediction and then read the prediction from its screen. This can probably be solved with an innovative interface design where the brain interfaces subconsciously with the intelligent machine.

What if humans come up with an innovative interface design ... ergo ... belief system ... enabling the human brain to interact with other human brains without any visual or audio? ... remote viewing 2.0

"the human brain interacting with other human brains without any visual or audio" is quite common in small (up to a hundred member) native communities. Some members of large and complex civilisations reactivate this capacity with LSD, mushrooms and other mind/brain altering substances.

Very interesting comments.

You're suggesting the "capacity" ... "the human brain interacting with other human brains without any visual or audio" ... is latent within the biology of the human brain. Further suggesting mind altering drugs disable the inhibitors ... ??? Perhaps the specie's psychosocial evolution gave birth to the inhibitors.

Obviously mass subscription to LSD is impractical ... yet ... perhaps a persistent ... intentional or otherwise ... "arousing" of individual human consciousness may eventually have the same impact on the inhibitors.

"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”